The Quality of Adjudication in France

Abstract

The quality of justice is not really assessed in France and there is much criticism (by judges, clerks, lawyers, etc.), since only quantity seems to matter. The financial Statute (LOLF) of 1st August 2001 provides that each public service is accountable for the use of public funds. The objective requires that high quality justice be provided within a reasonable time. The finance law sets quantitative targets each year for procedural delay and the rate of criminal justice response. The results obtained by each court determine the budget allocated. A logic based on performance indicators relate mainly to the length of proceedings in court has been developed. In contrast, the cost of procedures, the number of judges’ panels (rather than a single judge situation) and—in most cases—the quality of judgments, are not taken into account as indicators. For this reason the quality of judgment has long been the source of deeply felt demands for improvement on the part of judges, clerks and lawyers. So we recommend non quantitative tools such as organizing the return of appeal judgments for first instance judges, creating an email address for lay judges so that they can receive feedback on appeals following cases which take longer than usual, taking into account the specifics of each litigation, and tribunals for the allocation of funding. Harmonised case law is needed at each tribunal level. Lay judges have to be better educated, statistics have to be improved, and satisfaction surveys must be made on a regular basis. The judgment must be clear and has to be explained to the parties. The reasoning has to be understood and not be stereotyped. In this line, the Court of cassation recently decided to have longer motivations in response to the traditional criticism regarding the problems of conciseness and unclear decisions.